Since its beginnings in 1830, the Mormon Church has denied any
continuous historical connection with Christianity.

Mormonism's founder Joseph Smith, claimed that in 1820 God the Father and
Jesus Christ appeared to him in the woods near his home in Palmyra, New York.
Jesus said that for the proceeding 1700 years (give or take a century—Mormonism
can't say exactly) the world had been living in the darkness of a total apostasy
from the gospel. This was the answer to a question young Smith had been
pondering. "My object in going to inquire of the Lord was to know which of
these sects was right, that I might know which to join....I asked the personages
who stood above me in the light, which of all these sects was right (for at this
time it had never entered into my heart that all were wrong), and which I should
join. I was answered that I must join none of them for they were all wrong; and
the Personage who addressed me [Jesus] said that all their creeds were an
abomination in his sight; that their professors were all corrupt"

Smith convinced his credulous followers, most of them simple rural folk, that
he'd been chosen, in what Mormons have come to call the First Vision, to be the
first post-apostasy prophet—God's hand picked agent charged with restoring the
true gospel.

Over the next several years Smith purported to have received additional
revelations from "heavenly personages." He claimed that after
establishing his church in Palestine, the resurrected Jesus appeared in South
America to the Nephites (Jews who, Smith said, had migrated to the New World
between 600 and 592 B.C.) and organized a parallel church there (3 Nephi 11-28).

The new prophet seized on Jesus' words in John 10:16 ("I have other
sheep that do not belong to this fold. These also I must lead, and they hear my
voice, and there will be one flock, one shepherd") as proof of the Lord's
impending South American travel plans. The exegesis might impress one unfamiliar
with the New Testament, but the usual understanding is that the "other
sheep" Jesus referred to were the Gentiles, to whom the gospel also was
extended.

Smith claimed the Nephite church had the same hierarchy and ordinances as its
sister church in Palestine—living prophets, twelve apostles, seventy disciples—but
things didn't go well for either church. Both collapsed under the weight of
pagan influences, dissolving into complete apostasy.

The late Bruce McConkie, a Mormon apostle and, during his life, perhaps
Mormonism's leading theologian, explained things this way: "This universal
apostasy began in the days of the ancient apostles themselves; and it was known
to and foretold by them....With the loss of the Gospel, the nations of the earth
went into moral eclipse called the Dark Ages. Apostasy was universal...[T]his
darkness still prevails except among those who have come to a knowledge of the
restored Gospel."[1]

Mormons believe the church Jesus established in Palestine, before its
disintegration, was identical to the Mormon Church of today, with ceremonies
such as baptism for the dead, a polytheistic concept of God (including eternal
progression, the notion that God was a man who evolved into a god and that
worthy Mormon males can evolve into gods), and other peculiar Mormon beliefs.
The fact that no historical evidence exists to corroborate this position doesn't
put much of a dent in the average Mormon's mental armor.

A chief reason is the devotion Mormons have for Joseph Smith. They hold he
was God's mouthpiece. His "revelations" came directly from God. This
belief points to Mormonism's weak point. If you can demonstrate to a Mormon that
Smith was wrong about the great apostasy, Mormonism crashes down in a heap. If
Smith was wrong about this point, he could not have been a true prophet of God,
and Mormonism loses its basis (The Bible has strong words to say about false
prophets in Deuteronomy 13:2-6 and 18:20-22.)

If Smith was right about apostasy, then Jesus was a pathetic failure when it
came to establishing his Church. After all, what are we to think of his
promises? If there really was a complete apostasy, how do we explain our Lord's
claim that his Church never would be overcome, "Upon this rock I will build
my Church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it" (Matt
16:19)? What about his promise that he would be with his Church until the end of
time (Matt 28:20)? What about his promise to send the Holy Spirit as a guide who
would abide with the Church (John 14:16,26)? What about the Holy Spirit guiding
the Church into all truth (John 16:13)?

A key difficulty for Mormons is that they can't say exactly when the apostasy
took place nor can they point to any definitive historical event of it. Other
than Smith's claims there is only an interior feeling or testimony on which
Mormons can base their beliefs, but such subjective proof proves nothing.

There are only a few chosen choices: (1) Jesus' words in the passages just
cited were misreported; (2) Jesus did in fact say these things but didn't really
mean them—at least not in the way they had been understood by Christians for
the first eighteen centuries; (3) Jesus was a liar, or (4)Joseph Smith was wrong
and Jesus meant what he said.

Mormonism's claim to be the "restored" church hangs upon there
having been a complete apostasy. The late James E. Talmadge, prolific Mormon
writer and member of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles, wrote, "The Church
of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints proclaims the restoration of the Gospel,
and re-establishment of the Church as of old, in this, the dispensation of the
fullness of times. Such restoration and re-establishment, with the modern
bestowal of the holy priesthood, would be unnecessary and indeed impossible had
the Church of Christ continued among men with unbroken succession of priesthood
and power, since the meridian of time [the time of Christ].

"The restored Church affirms that a general apostasy developed during
and after the apostolic period, and that the primitive Church lost its power,
authority, and graces as a divine institution, and degenerated into an earthly
organization only. The significance and importance of this apostasy, as a
condition precedent to the re-establishment of the Church in modern times, is
obvious. IF THE ALLEGED APOSTASY OF THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH WAS NOT A REALITY, THE
CHURCH OF JESUS CHRIST OF LATTER-DAY SAINTS IS NOT THE DIVINE INSTITUTION ITS
NAME PROCLAIMS"[2] (emphasis added).

Talmadge is correct in evaluating the consequences, of course: if no
apostasy, no restoration, and if no restoration, no Mormonism.

Mormons misconstrue the biblical passages which do refer to a "great
apostasy" from the Christian Church. They read into the text a complete
apostasy. Scripture mentions an apostasy in Matthew 24:4-12; Mark 13:21-23; Luke
21:7-8; Acts 20:29-30; 2 Thessalonians 2:1-12; 2 Timothy 3:1-7, 4:1-4; 2 Peter
2:1-3; and Jude 17-19. Most of these verses say "many" will fall away,
and not one mentions a complete apostasy of the Church. Another complication for
Mormons is that these verses say the apostasy will take place at the end times,
the "latter days" as the King James renders it. The second and third
centuries were not the "latter days."

The next time you encounter the apostasy argument, ask the Mormon to read the
entire context of whatever verse he's quoting and show you where the writer
mentions a complete apostasy. Usually he'll claim a complete apostasy was the
intent of the writer and that it's at least implicitly taught in the Bible.

The best way to refute this charge is to have the Mormon read Jesus' promises
regarding the doctrinal integrity and the temporal perpetuity of his Church:
"On this rock I will build my Church, and the gates of hell shall not
prevail against it" (Matt 16:18); "Behold, I will be with you always,
even until the end of the world" (Matt 28:20); "The Father...will give
you another Advocate to be with you always" (John 14:16); "The
Advocate, the Holy Spirit that the Father will send in my name, he will teach
you everything and remind you of all I have told you" (John 14:26);
"But when he comes, the Spirit of truth, he will guide you to all
truth" (John 16:13). Go through each text, pointing out that none mentions
a complete apostasy.

Look also at the many New Testament verses which speak of the Church as
Christ's own body, such as Romans 12:1-5; 1 Corinthians 12:12-27; Ephesians
3:4-6; 5:21-32; and Colossians 1:18. Since Christ is the mind and head of his
Church (Eph 4:15-16), animating the body, the members enjoy and organic
spiritual union with him (John 15:1-8). It's inconceivable that he would permit
his body to disintegrate under the attacks of Satan. The apostle John reminds us
that Jesus is greater than Satan. (1 John 4:4).[3]

Although, tragically, the gates of hell can and do prevail over individual
Christians who succumb to mortal sin and cut themselves off from life-giving
union with Christ (Rom 11:22; Gal 5:4; 2 Peter 2:20-22; 1 John 5:16-17), they
can't prevail against the Church Jesus built on the rock of Peter.[4] If they
could—if they did—Jesus is made to look foolish for having taught,
"Which of you wishing to construct a tower does not first sit down and
calculate the cost to see if there is enough for its completion? Otherwise,
after laying the foundation and finding himself unable to finish the work the
onlookers should laugh at him and say, 'This one began to build but did not have
the resources to finish'" (Luke 15:28-30)

Consider another of Jesus' promises: "I will ask the Father and he will
send you another Advocate to be with you always, the Spirit of the truth, which
the world cannot accept, because it neither sees nor knows it. But you know it
because it remains with you, and will be in you. I will not leave you
orphans" (John 14:16-18). If Mormons are right about a complete apostasy,
Jesus did leave us as orphans—for 1700 years!

One thing Catholics should never do is try to avoid the fact that there have
been immoral and heterodox members in the Church. Jesus didn't promise that the
Church wouldn't be menaced by immorality and heterodoxy. Rather, he promised
that the wheat and the chaff (good and evil) would be side by side in the Church
until the end (Matt 13:24-43, 47-50).

In a recent written exchange[5], Mormon apologist Robert Starling, attempting
to prove the divine origin of the Mormon, cited the chief Rabbi Gamaliel's
prediction regarding the New Testament Church: "[I]f this endeavor or this
activity is of human origin, it will destroy itself. But if comes from God, you
will not be able to destroy them; you may even find yourselves fighting against
God" (Acts 5:38-39). Starling unwittingly undercut his own claim of a great
apostasy. Gamaliel was right. The Church Jesus built could not be destroyed.[6]

In refuting Mormonism's theory of a complete apostasy (and in the process
Mormonism itself), Catholics should be able to explain how the integrity of the
Church was preserved. The answer: apostolic succession, the unbroken continuum
of apostolic authority transmitted via the office of bishop. This doctrine is
the logical and scriptural alternative to the Mormon concept of an apostasy and
restoration.

Jesus bestowed a unique authority on the twelve apostles. He conferred on
them his power to bind and lose in heaven and on earth (Matt 18:18). He gave
them his authority to forgive sins (John 20:21-23; 2 Cor. 5:18-20). He
designated Peter as his vicar, giving him a special authority to govern the
Church (Matt 16:18-19; John 21:15-17). He promised the apostles that when they
taught, he spoke through them, and that whoever rejected their teachings
rejected Jesus himself (Matt 10:40; Luke 10:16).

As the Church got off the ground, the apostles transmitted this authority to
their successors (Acts 1:15-26). Paul exhorted a newly ordained bishop, "Do
not neglect the gift you have, which was conferred on you by the prophetic words
with the imposition of hands [ordination] of the presbyterate" (1 Tim.
4:14).

Later Paul reminded Timothy that the conferral of apostolic authority was not
to be handed on to others without prudent consideration of a candidate's
qualifications: "As for the imposition of hands, do not bestow it
inconsiderably" (1 Tim 5:22).

Apostolic succession can be seen in early Christian clearly writings outside
the New Testament. Around A.D. 80 Clement, a disciple of Peter and his third
successor as bishop of Rome, in his letter to the Corinthians, expounded on many
doctrines, including auricular confession, monotheism (Mormons claim the early
Church believed in a "plurality of gods" and eternal progression), the
ordained priesthood, and apostolic succession.

One of Clement's most telling lines is this: "Our apostles too were
given to understand by Our Lord Jesus Christ that the office of bishop would
give rise to intrigues. For this reason, equipped as they were with the perfect
foreknowledge, they appointed the men mentioned before and afterward and laid
down a rule once for all to this effect: When these men [bishops] die, other
approved men shall succeed to their sacred ministry."

In A.D. 110, Ignatius, bishop of Antioch and disciple of the apostle John,
while on his way in chains to Rome to be martyred for the faith, composed
letters to six major centers of Catholicism, along the route (Ephesus, Magnesia,
Tralles, Philadelphia, Smyrna, Rome). Ignatius provides us with valuable
insights into doctrines and practices of the Christian Church at the close of
the first century—only one generation removed from the time of Christ. His
writings make it clear that the early Church was thoroughly Catholic.

His letters contain a recurring exhortation to remain in communion with the
bishops who are successors to the apostles:

"Be eager, therefore, to be firmly grounded in the precepts of the Lord
and the apostles, in order that whatever you do you may prosper, physically and
spiritually in faith and love, in the Son and the Father and in the
Spirit...together with your most distinguished bishop and that beautifully-woven
spiritual crown which is your presbytery and the godly deacons. Be subject to
the bishop and to one another" (Letter to the Magnesians 13:1-2)

Another Church Father Irenaeus, bishop of Lyons, explained in A.D. 180,
"It is possible, then, for everyone to know the truth, to contemplate the
tradition of the apostles which has been made known throughout the whole world.
And we are in a position to enumerate those who were instituted bishops by the
apostles and their successors [down] to our own times; men who neither taught
anything like these heretics rave about.

"Since it would be too long to enumerate in such a volume at this the
succession of all the churches, we shall confound all those who, in whatever
manner, whether through blindness and wicked opinion, assemble other than where
it is proper, by pointing out here the succession of the bishops of the greatest
and most ancient church known to all, founded and organized at Rome by the two
most glorious apostles, Peter and Paul, that Church which has the tradition and
the faith which come down to us after having been announced to men by the
apostles. With this Church, because of its superior origin, all churches must
agree—all the faithful in the whole world—and it is in her that the faithful
everywhere have maintained the apostolic tradition" (Against Heresies,3,3:1-2)

The Mormon Church simply has no convincing answer to the ocean of the
biblical and historical evidence of which this is just a drop. All of it
contradicts the complete apostasy theory. Yet there's another problem with the
theory: the problem of silence. There's no evidence of any outcry from the first
or second century "Mormons" denouncing the introduction of
"Catholic heresies."

Mormons might respond that, since Catholics gained the upper hand in the
struggle for control of the true Church, they simply expunged any trace of the
Mormons—a comforting but inviable argument. We have records of many
controversies that raged in the early days of the Church (we know in great
detail what turmoil the early Church passed through as it fought off various
threats to its existence), and there just is no evidence—none at all—that
Mormonism existed prior to the 1830s.

It's unreasonable to assume the Catholic Church would allow the survival of
copious records chronicling the history, teachings, and proponents of dozens of
other heresies, but would entirely destroy only the records of early Mormonism.

If Mormons want their claim of a complete apostasy as to be taken seriously,
they must evince biblical and historical evidence supporting it. So far they've
come up empty-handed. Honest investigators will see the unavoidable truth: The
Mormon "great apostasy" doctrine is a myth. There never has been—nor
will there ever be—a complete apostasy. Jesus Christ promised that his Church,
established on the solid rock of Peter, will remain forever. We have his Word on
it.

Notes

[1] Bruce McConkie, Mormon Doctrine (Salt Lake City: Bookcraft,
1966ed.),43-44. McConkie, ever pugnacious when his religion was at stake, made
it clear that the Catholic Church was the wholly corrupt phoenix which rose from
the ashes of Christ's failed Church. "Iniquitous conditions in the various
branches of the great and abominable church in the last days are powerfully
described in the book of Mormon (2 Nephi 28; Mormon 8:28-38; Doctrine and
Covenants 10:56). It is also to the Book of Mormon to which we turn for the
plainest description of the Catholic Church as the great and abominable church.
Nephi saw this 'church was the most abominable above all other churches' in
[his] vision. He 'saw the devil that he was the foundation of it,' and also the
murders, wealth, harlotry, persecutions, and evil desires that historically have
been part of this satanic organization. He saw that this most abominable of all
churches was founded after the day of Christ and his apostles; that it took away
from the gospel of the Lamb many covenants and many plain and precious parts;
that it had perverted the right ways of the Lord; that it had deleted many
teachings from the Bible; that his church was the mother of harlots; and that,
finally, the Lord would again restore the gospel of salvation"
(ibid.,1958ed.,314-315). In recent years the Mormon Church has engaged in a
strenuous public relations program designed to garner for itself acceptance as a
mainstream "Christian" denomination. Anti-Catholic comments such as
McConkie's, although de rigour among Mormon apologists in the past, are no
longer allowed in official Mormon works.

[2] James E. Talmadge, The Great Apostasy (Salt Lake City: Desert
Books,1968ed.),iii. For a discussion of apostolic succession see Warren H.
Carroll, The Founding Of Christendom and The Building Of Christendom
(Front Royal: Christendom College Press,1985,1987).

[3] 1 Timothy 3:15 describes the Church as "The household of God...the
pillar and foundation of truth." In light of this, we find additional
assurance that the house that Jesus built will not be pillaged by Satan.
"No one can enter a strong man's house to plunder his property unless first
he ties up the strong man. Then, he can plunder his house" (Mark 3:27; cf.
Matt. 12:29). Jesus is the "strong man" guarding his household, the
Church.

[4] Jesus didn't command his followers to do things he himself couldn't do.
"Everyone who listens to these words of mine and acts on them will be like
a wise man who built his house on a rock. The rain fell, the floods came, and
the winds blew and buffeted the house. But it did not collapse; it had been set
solidly on a rock" (Matt 7:24-25). It was no coincidence that Jesus used
the words, "on this rock I will build my Church and the gates of hell shall
not prevail against it" (Matt 16:18; Luke 6:46-49). See also Hebrews 11:10
and 1 Peter 2:6-8.

[5] This Rock (July 1991), 18.

[6] For a full length examination of this issue see the two hour video-taped
debate. A Catholic-Mormon Dialogue (Patrick Madrid vs. Gary Coleman,
1989), available from This Rock. This was the first-ever debate between a
Catholic apologist and an official representative of the Church of Jesus Christ
of Latter-day Saints.

[7] For a thorough treatment of early Church writings see William Jurgens'
three-volume Faith Of The Early Fathers (Collegeville: Liturgical Press,
1970) and Johannes Quasten's four volume, Patrology (Westminster,
Maryland: Christian Classics, 1986). The best available critique of Mormonism,
including the First Vision, is found in Jerald and Sandra Tanner's Changing
World Of Mormonism (Chicago: Moody Press,1980)